Court ruling causes UC to re-evaluate outreach

By Ruby Jain
Daily Bruin Contributor

A ruling by the California Supreme Court outlawing government
outreach programs that target women and minorities is raising new
concern about UCLA’s informational outreach practices, which
attempt to attract underrepresented minorities to the
university.

The high court’s decision in Hi-Voltage Wire Works v. City
of San Jose involved a challenge to a city contract recruiting
program that required contractors who bid on projects to recruit a
specified percentage of subcontractors owned by minorities and
women. The contractors did not have to employ any specified number
of minority- or women-owned businesses.

As the first ruling on the scope of Proposition 209, it declares
unconstitutional any outreach effort that grants preferential
treatment on the basis of race or gender.

“The opinion suggests that the burden on the university is
to demonstrate any distinction in outreach is not
preferential,” said Vice Chancellor of Legal Affairs Joe
Mandel, who is helping interpret the ruling’s implications
for the UC schools. He said while the definition of preferential is
ambiguous, it “sends an alarm to all outreach
programs.”

In a letter to UC President Richard Atkinson and the
chancellors, UC’s Office of the General Counsel noted that
the university analyzed its programs in the areas of
“business, contracting, employment, admissions, and outreach
changing those which could be characterized as preferential”
following the passage of SP-1 and SP-2, which ended the use of
affirmative action throughout the university.

Because of those initial changes, the university is shielded
from most of the implications of the lawsuit such as those dealing
with contracting, admissions, or employment, officials said.

Outreach at UCLA mainly targets low-performing schools to help
make prospective students aware of, and prepared for, the
educational opportunities of the university.

“We use socioeconomic status, but mainly see how well a
school performs,” said Co-Chair of the Outreach Steering
Committee Aimee Dorr.

Usually, these low-performing schools have a high number of
minorities, she said.

UC spokesman Terry Lightfoot said the university’s primary
concern was over UC’s practice of sending admission and
financial aid information to underrepresented minorities.
 

“We target minorities already admitted to UCLA because it
is no longer a question of equal access,” said Jane Permaul,
special assistant for outreach in the office of student
affairs.

In this manner, they try to attract underrepresented minorities
to choose UCLA often through phone calls made by volunteering
alumni.

The general counsel in the letter cautioned any university
program based on race, gender or ethnicity for the purpose of
sharing information to solicit applications as highly vulnerable to
legal challenges.

The court rejected San Jose’s arguments that stated
outreach is not preferential and that it should be permissible
because it is designed to expand the applicant pool.

A similar outreach program in Los Angeles which requires
contractors to reach out to small businesses owned by women and
minorities will remain untouched by the decision because the
program adds the word “other” in its targeting of
groups such as minorities and women.

Such semantic differences have allowed the program to increase
the number of contracts awarded to businesses owned by minorities
and women from 18 to 25 percent, according to city officials.

While an official report of outreach’s success in
increasing UC-eligible students is under way, any progress is
appreciated in some high schools which depend on UCLA’s
educational partnership.

“They provide bilingual workshops, workshops for parents,
and are very agreeable to work with,” said Linda Loya, a
counselor at Huntington Park High School.

To work within current or possible laws and legal
interpretations restricting affirmative action, many schools have
altered their admissions policies to recruit more minorities
without resorting to affirmative action.

While the U.S. Supreme Court has yet to rule on Proposition 209,
some students and educators said affirmative action is necessary to
preserve racial diversity.

“The lack of racial diversity is a problem, and unless we
target our outreach efforts specifically and effectively, then we
can’t deal with the problem,” said Student Regent
Justin Fong.

“We cannot achieve the level of diversity we should have
without affirmative action,” said Fong, who favors the repeal
of SP-1 and SP-2.

But problems achieving a more diverse student body are rooted in
the preparation provided by often underperforming high schools that
send students to universities with high standards, according to a
report by the Outreach Steering Committee.

“Preserving racial diversity is a challenge, but I think
we’re all trying to do a better job,” Lightfoot
said.